inCommon had a great run: posts on NYC’s effort to improve civic engagement in immigrant communities, a link to a Christian Science Monitor article on participatory budgeting, how crowd wisdom is undermined by knowledge of other people’s responses (citing a story in Wired Magazine), and clues that a public engagement process may not be very effective.
You’ll find another post on participatory budgeting in Engaging Cities, this one exploring its spread in the United States. And Engaging Cities also makes the case about the importance of online tools like Twitter for public involvement.
A Ken Eklund guest post on Museum 2.0 describes a terrific game-based experiment with mobile phones, designed to help visitors connect with a park in San Diego. The approach could be used in plenty of contexts.
The Australian e-journal On Line Opinion describes the elements of an effective deliberative democracy, including the ability of participants to actually influence the decision-making process, and how representative the group is of the larger community (h/t to Deliberations for the link).
Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space comments on the value of the initiative process for securing community buy-in for large infrastructure projects.
On the PlaceMatters blog, Jason asks if games can save the world, and Jocelyn wonders aloud about applying the lessons of TED and TED’s exceptional speakers to the challenges of community decision-making. Jason also reports on a new spatial decision support portal from the University of Redlands.
What did we miss?